Here is the 328,000 reason this superintendent should no longer be leading this district. And for the majority 4 and other pro-superintendent people out there, the blunder is bad enough, but breadown in communication? Serously? He made the conscience decision not to tell the BOE. No wonder the state keeps close tabs on us. He need knew verbally in February and the letter confirmation came on August 29th. The BOE was just told last week???? He needs to be gone now. He works for us remember????

A "breakdown in communication" is the explanation? That is so weak!! Isn’t it really NO communications? Ricker and Germany are informed in Feb. and the board is informed in Dec. Is anybody surprised Mr. Beckwith was thrown under the bus? I hope the Patch reaches out to him for his side of the story. How can the board sit back and take no action now? This is known by Ricker & Germany while budgets are being worked on to submit to the State. Now I better understand why Ricker & Tovian cautioned the board about spending as the district continues to build its reserves. They held this information knowing the State had to be reimbursed $328K. How can the community or the Board not take action now? The majority 4 should reconsider how they support Ricker moving forward. By supporting Ricker they are just as much of the problem by continuous support of his antics. When is enough, enough?

According to the article above:"According to Ricker, a letter regarding the audit adjustment was received Aug. 29. At that point, he claims he delegated the report to Germany."
Why would you delegate something of this magnitude to some else?
If it was delegated to Germany- why didn't she inform the board?
Why are the "4" still clinging to Ricker & the old regime board decisions/ actions- it's a sinking ship that they should abandon before they go down with it.

the plot thickens. What else will be brought to light by the ISBE audit? Maybe more audits by the ISBE should be forthcoming. Like from 2002 to present.

I seem to recall that this information was something that Janet Hughes,Laura Reigle and others tried to bring to the community's attention at the time & were called kooks and slanderers?

The truth always comes out in the end, it just takes a while.

You see, if the Majority 4 FINALLY did the right thing and got rid of Ricker now, they would be admitting they were wrong about his ability (inability) to lead. They would much rather cling to RIcker and ignore the public's demand to take the appropriate action rather than bruising their precious egos.

And I love how Ricker threw Germany under the bus. Who knows what he told her once he "delegated" the report to her. If I were her, I'd be circulating my resume. Why would anyone want to work with someone like that?

Yes Jorg, we all knew you would come out with your remarks that try to create diversion to the issue at hand being discussed here. If you read my comments closely, I am not questioning the audit. I am frustrated that Ricker KNEW about it and did not inform the BOE until last week. He admitted that. I suggest you (or your spouse) go back to law school and re-educate yourself on slander. Ricker admitted he did not inform the BOE, even after the state threatened FOP. Period.

Jorg, or are you Tim, I am never sure who you are! In any case, as Donald Trump would say to you if he were your boss - "You're FIRED". Too bad the "gang of four" Board Members are protecting you. It seems as if "you" have something to hold over them.

By the way, my name is Bill Montgomery! What is your real name?

Jorge, I get the $328K is a small part of the budget and adjustments for reimbursements may happen much more then we know. If that is the case why not give the Board a heads-up in Feb. after Tovian & Ricker were given the verbal by the auditor the problem exists. Then the Aug. 29th letter is received by Ricker and still no word to the Board for almost 4 more months. That lack of communications is blamed on Germany as Ricker claims he delegated the report to Germany, whatever that means. At the least Ricker should have followed-up with Germany to understand when the Board would be informed, but appears he never did. If this is an every day occurrence as you suggest then why not inform the Board and the community of the inaccurate reporting that took place under his watch. To me this goes to building credibility which Ricker seems to care less about. It’s kind of like doing the right thing when nobody else is watching. So Ricker has nobody to blame but himself for making his mole hole a mountain.

There are two REAL issues. First, the additional $330,000 expense (or $110,000 if repayment is spread over 3 years) was not built into the current year's budget. So the district will have to find additional ways to cut other expenses to offset, or there will be added pressure on cash flow and a year-end variance from budget in that amount. Second, until our district can demonstrate financial competence, it will remain under a microscope by the ISBE. Is this situation the end of the world? No. But just another situation that shows the ISBE that our financial processes are not yet where they need to be.

Jorg, I too read Ricker delegated to Germany. What I question is why Ricker/Tovian didn’t relay the news to Germany during the transition and to the Board in Feb. I would think this is information they all would and should have as they were working on budgets and trying to prevent the FOP. Not sure if the information would have changed the budget, but they still should have known. If it’s no big deal then why look as if you’re hiding information, like it or not that is the way it appears. The damage the delay of information caused the district is in CREDITBILITY with the Board, the staff and the community. I really doubt that Bill and I are the only ones wondering what else will be uncovered prior to and after Ricker departs.

Board President Mike Aurelio and Board Members Karen Siston and Al Malley cast the dissenting votes. These are the only board members with a brain in their heads. The rest should crawl back into the hole Ricker came out of along with him.

Mike, you are correct that MOST people feel that way but don't comment here. I normally don't but am astonished at this event. Not only further cover-up exposed but inexcusable incompetence on the part of anyone involved in preparing those claims.

Jorg, if the Board, especially Malley, Aureilo and Siston had been informed of the $328K mistake in Feb, I'm very confident they would have not suggested we spend more money. Now you have me wondering if the majority 4 were aware of the required reimbursement prior to the official announcement to the community and wanted to hold on to funds for the repayment. Any chance Ricker told some but not all? Fair question don't ya think.

Jorg, you don't seem to understand that when you are under scrutiny you must go above and beyond to ensure no one would misunderstand or suspect anything, on any topic. You cannot afford to delegate and forget. Not doing this leaves an impression of incompetence or arrogance. That speaks directly to credibility.

What are the odds that Germany's review of the 09/10 and 10/11 claims will find the same errors associated with the bus leases that existed in the 08/09 claim? Looks like the potentail for an additional $600,000 in exposure. When is the board expecting to hear the results from Germany on her review of those two years of claims?

Jorg, why do you keep defending the fact Ricker/Tovian were aware of this in FEB. when the verbal was provided during the audit. The right thing to do for the right reason would have been to inform the entire Board of the findings THEN so the repayment could have been considered during the budget process. I feel bad for Ms.Germany having this thrown in her lap at any time, but if Ricker delegated this to her on Aug. 29th she should have been given the green light to inform the Board and the community. I just hope she wasn’t asked by Ricker to take one for the team. Unfortunately you may be correct about “No CREDITIBILITY loss here.” From many viewpoints Ricker had non left to lose. He needs to be put on the sidelines right away so the Board can do the research they need to do before the State does so.

The auditors can't be too happy with this disclosure. They just signed off on the audit in October. This should have been accrued in FY11. It should have been addressed in the Notes to the Financial Statements in the audit report. At a minimum, it should have been disclosed as a Subsequent Event since the second notice came in August. If the auditor's can't trust the client, they either drop the client to eliminate their liability or they raise their fees to the client to compensate for an expanded audit scope and/or compensate for the additional risk associated with that client. Was the board informed as to what feedback, if any, the auditor's had regarding this news? Were the auditor's even informed prior to the meeting?

Did a quick check of the 09/10 audited results for the Transportation Fund. It shows revenue from the state of $689,380. Assuming all of the $305,056 adjustment referenced above rolled into this total, it means revenue was over-stated by 79%. The Trans Fund for 10/11 shows actual revenue of $670,176 in the audited financials. Based on that revenue number, I think its highly likely that the $670,176 revenue number is similiarly over-stated. One might also conclude that the financial projections that the district has been using were built using comparable revenue numbers from the Trans Fund and, therefore, all future years revenues are also similiarly over-stated.

And folks there is more to come! If I were Mr. Ricker I would immediately resign and head to Mo. And if I were one of the "gang of four" I would demand that a special meeting be called to "FIRE Mr. RICKER" now, not later.

I assure all of you there is a lot more coming out in the near future. This is not a threat, it is a promise!

William , I could not agree more Ricker should be fired. All it takes is a majority of the school board's vote. Jorg what makes you think you deserve to keep your position?

Jorg, actually when the 113a administration does something to deserve compliments I will the first in line to say so. I’ve never said I was an authority, you did. Thanks, however, the administration is elected & hired authority sworn to act with a high level of integrity and honesty. I get the Board is not paid, but they did sign up for the opportunity to do the right thing for the right reason. Ricker gets paid very handsomely for his responsibilities and is suppose to be held accountable. When is that going to happen?
You said “Mike, it just proves that the other four may understand government/school finances better than Aurelio, Malley, and Siston. Maybe so if they went to the Ricker/Tovian School of Finance. I know Kelly said she wanted to keep Ricker around to learn from him. Wonder how she likes this lesson?. I’m not concerned about other districts. Don’t pay any taxes there and we have plenty to watch and comment on here.
Finally, all any of us expect is our elected and paid officials to be honest, act with integrity and do the right thing one nobody is watching. That did not happen for a minimum of 4 months and the way I see it 10 months. You can continue to support them with your fake name if you like, but honestly you have no creditibility by using a fake name.

Hasn't anyone here identified the main point? Look a little deeper at the issue. Make it more personal - and you'll figure out what happened here....

Please, Catherine, let us in on the main point.

Lee: I don't know Ricker. I've never met him. I'm not saying he's guilty because I can only base my opinions on my experience of working with boards and education my entire career.

The bottom line is this: IF he intentionally withheld this from the board - and "IF" he was negligent in sharing this at an appropriate time -- and "IF" the board fires him AFTER they agreed to let him retire early -- then there will be litigation. There is always litigation. It will cost the town a ton of money.

He didn't manage the finances and all he is guilty of is not sharing it the board.

They got nothing on him - and he will sue them, and win. And when all is said and done -- if they are smart -- and (again, only if this proven to be true) - they should put hiim on paid leave - and pay him out.

@Catherine,
IF you had attended even one board meeting;
IF you had been paying attention the last couple years on the countless blunders;
IF you didn't ignore the fact he left his two previous school districts in worth poor track records in financial incompetence
IF you even read this article or was at Wednesday BOE meeting you would know he admitted to not telling the BOE even as Doherty, Aurelio and Malley were headed to Springfield to address the state on FOP-

you would know they have plenty on him. This most recent issue came after he conveniently submitted his resignation (retirement). The only motivation here is (hopefully) getting rid of the problem before more disaster strikes. If I had to guess, I would also bet the state wasn't too happy about this either.

If they have done their due diligence and have enough to fire him for cause, then that is what they should do. We should not be afraid either. That is what unfortunately happens a lot in the private sector, people get fired and sue all the time knowing that most employers would rather settle than defend themselves cause it does have cost attached to it. If Ricker is fired (and for cause) then I trust the BOE has taken everything into consideration it has to in order to protect the district. I am not emotionally involved, but I have followed this a lot closer than you have. I think you are a reasonable person Catherine, but if you actually looked at the last two years and what has transpired, you would be mad too. Ricker has shown us time and again that he is arrogant enough to think he is above it all. Merry Christmas.

Thanks Ann. I don't think you are unreasonble, either....but you are very mad and empassioned about the issue (never a bad thing, IMO) But, Anne,- there is someone out there weighing the odds of what is right and what is wrong. There are no doubt attornies involved - and no doubt some figuring out "risk".

I don't know the inner workings of this district, I just know what I've experienced in my career and as a diehard news reader - of various educational chronicles -- I think IF they legally have something on Ricker, who did talk to the business manager, (covered himself, there) and IF they have to get rid of him - they should put him on paid leave - and pay him out. The risk, here, is too high, to just fire him.

Past performance - will never make it into a court of law. And unlike private sector jobs - Ricker has a written contract -- that is why so many admiistors are put on paid leave. Google the questions: adminsitrators on paid leave -- and see the fright.

Again, I don't claim to be an expert at this stuff - but if they fire him - it will be closed door -- and every litigation effort will also be closed door. It will cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Sorry for my typos. :) Good luck to everyone involved. I just want to spend my day thinking about the holidays - and a nice little break -- so - I wish you well -- and won't be checking back at this board for a few weeks.. (Not healthy for me, and would rather spend the day singing Christmas tunes). Merry Christmas all!! :)

One of the more disturbing things to me was this quote out of the Suburban Life article on 12/21 by Germany, “I have experience with audit adjustments, Generally, if you haven’t received the information.. it won’t hit until the next fiscal year. I would have included it in the budgetary process (if the district knew the money would have been taken this fiscal year)." Clearly she did not understand the impact of this event for a district that is on the "Accrual" method of accounting. This comment demonstrates a "Cash Basis" methodology mindset. That this was something that should have been recorded immediately is something one learns in Accounting 101. What's even more problematic is that when she learns of this material, adverse event in August, she fails to disclose it to the auditors who are literally in her office during that time frame performing the year-end audit. She had a duty to disclose that to the auditors. Someone on the board needs to call the Partner in Charge from the audit firm and ask them when the district notified them of this event. Second, they need to ask them what the auditor's course of corrective action will be with respect to recording this audit adjustment (i.e. prior period adjustment or current period). Third, what impact, if any, will there be to the recently completed FY11 Audit (Correction letter?). Fourth, what level of involvement would the auditors like in addressing the review of these additional years of Trans claims.

Unfortunately, this has a cascading effect on several issues unrelated to employment decisions. First, one can probably safely conclude that any possibility of a third party financial institution lending the district money in the upcoming round of TAWs issuance is now zero. Second, the upcoming resolution to have the O&M and Trans funds lend money to the Ed fund to pay off the existing TAW's needs to be re-evaluated. The Trans fund had only $741k as of 6/30/11. That fund runs a deficit and now will be hit with a $305k adjustment, plus the prospect of additional adjustments depending on the outcome of the review of the Trans claims from multiple years. The result of this process might result in the complete depletion of the Trans fund. They might want to check on the legality of an interfund loan from the Trans fund which has a negative fund balance. Third, the review of prior Trans claims needs to be completed a soon as a possible. This probably would require bringing back in ISBE's auditor ASAP. Until there is a determination of the validity of the Trans revenue numbers, the FY12 Budget and all the future financial projections just voted on and submitted to ISBE are worthless. Fourth, Will this episode change ISBE's perspective when working with the district in the future? Could it get any worse? Fifth, all of this costs money.

Many seem to think that Jorg is Tim!
But maybe we are all wrong!
Maybe Jorg is a woman who chews gum!
Doesn't Lisa Wright chew gum?
Well Jorg if you are not Lisa you certainly know how to "chew the fat".

Hey Charles, I am impressed with your financial knowledge! Maybe you could help them get this mess straightened out.

Catherine, I wish you a Merry Christmas too. However, I will miss all of your "spinning"!
It is really very amusing.

Just read the following comment in today's MySuburbanLife article: "Even with an unexpected hit this year of more $100,000 to the transportation fund, Ricker said the school district will not have to make any cuts. He said there is enough money in the fund to cover the loss.

“It won’t affect it,” said Ricker, who announced his June 2012 retirement in October. “The money is in the transportation fund.”

Aurelio echoed that statement, saying the district would be able to absorb the loss without any impact.

“We are running a big surplus in that fund,” Aurelio said.

As I indicated above, per the audit, the 6/30/11 Trans Fund balance was $741k. We know that the Trans Fund balance was overstated by $328k, which means the current balance now stands at $413k pending further reviews. I don't think anyone can conclude with ANY certainty at this time that “We are running a big surplus in that fund.” I did a quick review of the FRIS Trans claim data and historical Trans claims were running at elevated levels until this past year when it dropped substantially. Maybe that's an indication that the Trans claim submission was finally done correctly? I don't know. If true, then the district might have substantial exposure for several year's worth of adjustments and the Trans Fund will end up with a negative fund balance. Which is the exact opposite of what's being asserted above by Messrs Ricker and Aurelio.

There is something I think everyone to read! It can be read on the following web site.
Click miscellanous to get information on Lisa Wright and Kevin Doherty.

Mr. Doherty has been on the Board since 2007 and Ms. Wright has been on since 2005.

I would appreciate other peoples thoughts after reading these statements, because I have a hard time understand their positions on Mr. Ricker and how they could let District 213a be in the position it is today.

http://aplusforsd113a.com/miscellanous-documents/

go to miscellanous to pull us Lisa Wright and Kevin Dogerty's campaign statements

For future reference, it's "...in the MIDST of...". Not "...in the MISTS of..."

Charles, from my understanding of school finances, Dr. Ricker and Mr. Aurelio are correct in their statements. The district should be able to do an interfund loan from the Transportation Fund to the Education Fund as planned. The district may need to borrow more in TAWS though, but since a conservative budget was passed and the district was on a schedule to not be reliant on TAWS sooner than originally thought, this should not impact the district negatively. If you are correct in your assumption concerning the Transportation reimbursements from the state, I would not be surprised if the district may need to borrow another round of TAWS.
Since the superintendent and the school board has a good working relationship with the high school, I would assume that the ability to borrow TAWS should not be impacted.

Hi Dave,

First of all I like that you support your friends. But, as most of us know, friends are not always perfect or correct.

Second, I love the way you throw out the term "possibly slanderous". Is that supposed to scare me? It does not Dave!

Third, I admire all of those who serve on Boards for nothing or little money. But it does not mean that I have to agree with them or question how well they are doing their job as a member of a Board. Remember, they are there to serve us, the residents and taxpayers.

Fourth, Dave you need to do a lot research on the events that have taken place with District 113a finances over the last 5 years. In my opinion and that of many others our District 113a financial management HAS BEEN, IS, and CONTINUES TO BE AWFUL.
The Board Members need to start correcting the problems. Tonight, I hope they start by FIRING one of the main causes of these problems - Mr. Ricker.

And Fifth Dave, (No, I am not taking The Fifth Amendment!)
I stand by what I say and will continue to do so!
You too can do the same!
This what our Country is all about - FREEDOM!

CORRECTION!
"This IS what our Country is all about - FREEDOM!"

Mr Montgomery,

While I am not a proponent of reposting, sometimes it is necessary

"I find it interesting that you NEVER point out in your posts that the financial deficits of this district started BEFORE these two members were elected and have been resolved while they have been on the board. Why is that Mr MOntgomery?"

In addition, I would like to mention a few other things. I have spent a significant amount of time going through financial and other documents from our district. What you seem to forget is that the financial stabilization of this district has already begun.
1. The previous and current boards have spent at least three years cutting expenses.
2. We have run a surplus in this district for at least 2 full school years.
3. We have a balanced budget for the 2011 and 2012 school year.
4. We have replaced our business manager (who, coincidentally filled out these documents incorrectly).
5. The district has changed auditors
6. The district has re-evaluated PMA and chose to keep them.
7. The district has closed a school deemed not necessary for the current enrollment.

Mr. Montgomery, obviously you haven't been paying attention the last 3 years. If the superintendent gets terminated, this won't be the first change this, and previous, board have made for the betterment of the district.

Thanks for noticing!!!

Mr Montgomery,

One more question, didn't this board already begin the process of finding a new superintendent?

Great points Mr. Maher!

Dear Dave,
I know you want to point out all the things that have been done recently to supposedly improve the operation of District. HOWEVER, after all of your 7 points listed above we still have big problems. In the eyes of SMART PEOPLE we are losing the game.

Our credit rating stinks and probably will continue for some time to come.

The State School Board lacks confidence in our financial management.

We need to change the way things are being done. Let's look for solutions that will get us out of this mess. For one thing I suggest that the Board get a committee of highly qualified business people (and we have some really smart ones who live in our District) to advise the Board on how get District 113a to go from a BBB rating to AAA+ rating.

So Dave, why don't we have lunch in the next couple of weeks and start a new
pact to get us on the right track?

Jorg, Tim, Lisa, whatever, the FOIA police would not exist if public information was made available to the taxpaying pubic upon request. Instead we are made to jump through hoops to get information as to how our hard earned tax dollars are spent. I believe it's called transparency.

Hank, you show me another school district that is harassed nearly as much as this one. You can't, because this is totally unheard of. Most districts get perhaps a handful of FOIA requests a year, not hundreds that cost it over 30,000 a year. Why don't the FOIA police start reimbursing the district the costs of these requests instead of putting the cost of this harrassment on the rest of us taxpayers? I believe it is called cheap.

Remember the school board election was AFTER the Feb. notice from the state explaining the audit problem. I would guess ricker was nervous about the election, and who would be in control. If he lost his job before the end of the 2010-11 school year, he would not have reached the magic 5 yrs needed to be vested in the Illinois teacher retirement system. Now that he made it thru, he is elegible for the Illinois retirement, and that is in addition to his current MO retirement. The man has many undesirable traits, but he is not stupid. He knows how to communicate... he does it thru the Patch comments quite well. It seems he underestimated the patience of his supporters, and his attempt at self preservation cost him in the end....not financially, unfortunately , but certainly his reputation. It takes character to admit being wrong, Anyone who still so vehemently supports him now is either a relative or someone who is more concerned about themselves than the students of sd113a.